By Tom
As a people, we have a weird relationship with data. On the
one hand, we love to collect it; we love to measure every possible entity from
every conceivable angle so that we can arrange all those numbers in tables,
spreadsheets and graphs. On the other hand, we like to take all those numbers
and distill them down to a single digit. It’s as if we overwhelm ourselves with
numbers and respond by getting rid of most of them.
One of my fourth graders was able to put her finger on it. We
were learning how to find averages. One of the practice problems involved five
kids who went fishing. Each kid caught a different number of fish and my
students had to find the average. Like a good teacher, I started with the concrete.
I had each student build towers of interlocking cubes corresponding to the
fish. When they were done, they all had five towers of cubes standing on their
desks. “Finding the average,” I announced, “means finding the number of fish
each kid caught, if they all caught the same amount. That means we’ll have them
‘share’ the fish. We take some fish from the lucky kids and give them to the kids
who weren’t so lucky. We’ll ‘even out’ the towers until they’re all the same
height.” The answer was six. Then I showed them how to find the same number by
adding up all the fish and dividing the total by five. The answer was still
six.
That’s when Kiran spoke up. “I understand how to do this,
but I’m not sure why,” she said, “Why is the average number of fish more
important than knowing how many fish each kid caught?” Good question, Kiran.
It’s the same question I have about Senate Bill 5328, which
is moving its way through the Washington Legislature. It would require the
state to post a letter grade for each school based on how well their students
did on the state test. The bill's supporters think it will make it easier for parents to figure
out how well their local schools are doing, while holding educators more
accountable for their students’ achievement. I think it’s unnecessary,
simplistic and at odds with the last school-reform law out of Olympia: the teacher
evaluation system.
It’s unnecessary in that everything used to produce the
letter grade is already available. OSPI already posts the very test results
that would be used for these “report cards.” They even have them disaggregated by
grade level, ethnicity and subject area. And there’s more! You can find out
average class size, the experience level of the staff, the programs they offer,
and the name of the principal. Anyone with a computer can have instant access
to more data about any school than they’ll ever need. But maybe that’s the
point; maybe there’s so much information that we need someone to boil it down
for us. Turns out we already have that, too. Thanks to the good people at the
Washington Policy Center, we can already find out what the report cards
will look like if and when this bill becomes law. Like I said: unnecessary.
(By the way, how did yours do? My school got a B.)
Yes. My school got a B. But what does that tell you? Nothing
really, other than the fact that a lot of our students scored well on the MSP.
But that doesn’t really tell you how good the teachers are. Or the principal.
It doesn’t tell you about our drama club or our after school homework club. It
doesn’t tell you about our character education program or the recess intramural
program. In fact, it really doesn't tell you much at all. My point is this: there’s a lot going at our school – at any school –
that defies distillation into a single grade. And to pretend otherwise is as
condescending as it is disingenuous. A letter grade system is nothing but an
oversimplification of something that is – and should be – very complex.
It also runs counter to what this very Legislature produced
last year. That’s when they rolled out the new teacher evaluation system. The
logic being that student achievement depends on teacher effectiveness, so if we
properly evaluate our teachers we can find out which ones are effective and
which ones need support or perhaps a new career. It was accountability at the
classroom level, which is probably where it belongs. This bill lifts
accountability back up to the school-wide level, which causes all kinds of
problems, especially when there’s money involved. Did I mention that teachers
at “A” schools would get to share a financial bonus? They do. How would you
feel as a highly-effective teacher in a “D” school knowing that an ineffective
teacher at an “A” school was getting a bonus due to the hard work and talent of
his colleagues and their students? I can tell you how I’d feel. Demoralized and
furious, that’s how.
Which takes us back to what Kiran said: “I understand how to
do this, but I’m not sure why.” Why is knowing a single letter representing the
average score on a series of standardized tests more important than knowing how
well each teacher is doing and how much each student is learning?
It isn’t.
@Jeffreyd32: “Likewise, why do we give our students simplistic letter grades rather than a comprehensive evaluation with more meaning and depth?”
I get your sentiment. I think that good teachers are ones who do offer a comprehensive evaluation through the feedback they offer to students. Sadly, our system is so caught up in the concept of “grading marks” and uniformity of reporting that too often this kind of feedback happens on a personal level–or even at an assignment-by-assignment level–that it, like all the other important conversation that might happen around a letter grade–gets lost.
I teach 9th grade English, a graduation requirement. All I get to put on my kids’ transcript is a letter grade. Would their future college, trade school, or employer need to see the feedback I’ve given to the student to help him/her grow as a reader and writer? Probably not. But if I’ve done my job well, my student will have been receiving ongoing, frequent, and detailed feedback to help describe what that “B” (or whatever) really means in terms of their skills, strengths, and areas for growth.
Arizona gives our schools a letter grade, and it stinks. That letter grade can be the kiss of death when a school is deemed underperforming or failing, especially now that even schools within the same district are competing for students.
Currently, our school is a “C.” What does that mean? It means the district wants us to (once again) increase instructional time each week next year, despite cutbacks of support staff, supplies, and (effectively) a teacher pay freeze for the last five years. (We’ve had raises but they’ve been offset by other increases to our contributions to everything.)
I agree– This type of system is too simplistic and does not respond to the individual conributions or failings of teachers. What if my students were evaluated according to the class average? Craziness.
This idea was Jay Inslee’s, and I think you’re right – it’s intended to simplify all of the information out there so parents can make an easier choice.
But that is helping only a certain kind of parent.
My husband and I, both educators, toured only one school – our local elementary. Basically, we toured only because everyone we knew who was in the same position was frantically touring schools in an effort to get their child into the “best” school.
Having seen hundreds (I’ve seen more than a thousand) of kids go through school ourselves, we figured it was more about the fit than the ranking.
We liked what we saw as we toured Bagley, feeling a little guilty that everyone in our tour knew each other from touring every other elementary in the city. But it wasn’t until one mom asked, “Can you explain why your fourth grade WASL scores dropped in 2009?” and the dad leading the tour said, “I don’t know. We’re not too concerned about fourth grade WASL scores here.” that I looked at my husband and said, “This is the place for us.”
I think it’s really important that state scores have revealed inequity. Now that we know how bad it is, we should be doing something about it. Continuing to use scores as the goal is a mistake. They are an indicator, and what they indicate is that poor kids don’t do as well. Affluent kids are doing just fine. White and Asian kids are doing just fine. Native American, Hispanic and African American kids aren’t.
To continue to focus on the score instead of the solutions is not going to help schools make the progress they need to.
Any parent who focuses on getting their child into a school based on a letter grade, instead of finding a place where their child will be a happy learner, is being misled.
Likewise, why do we give our students simplistic letter grades rather than a comprehensive evaluation with more meaning and depth?
At this point it looks like the House is leaning against this bill. Wait and see…
What difference does it make if parents get handed this simplistic letter grade on “how well/bad” their child’s school is? Unless the parents can afford to send their child elsewhere, they’re stuck anyway.
Currently, Indiana public schools are fighting a law that allows low-income students public money vouchers to attend schools of their choice, even private religious schools, because they claim it is taking public money away from schools that need it most.
But then we’re back to “if my school is bad I still can’t go anywhere else without money”…..and back to the unspoken realization that “good” schools are good because of the people/money already available there!
It’s chicken and the egg many times over 😉
Yes, this A-F system is too simplistic indeed. This is not a bill that would help student learning–it’s the Scarlet Letter approach to rating schools.